Shrine of Flaming Capitalism

Archive for the ‘Science’ Category

Dear Readers: The MUT family went to the California Science Center yesterday. The Young Prince is a big fan of science and technology, so he, Horemheb, and sister were delighted to see the Space Shuttle Endeavor:

Space exploration is really bad for our squidgy bodies, but you want to know the worst news? According to new research, it’s really, really bad for our squidgy brains too. The high-energy particles that buzz around outside of our protective magnetosphere aren’t only a trigger for nasty cancers, they may also trigger certain brain defects, such as Alzheimer’s disease.

“Galactic cosmic radiation poses a significant threat to future astronauts,” said M. Kerry O’Banion, a professor in the University of Rochester Medical Center (URMC) Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy, in a URMC press release. “The possibility that radiation exposure in space may give rise to health problems such as cancer has long been recognized. However, this study shows for the first time that exposure to radiation levels equivalent to a mission to Mars could produce cognitive problems and speed up changes in the brain that are associated with Alzheimer’s disease.”

And that, my friends, is very bad news if you want to see mankind as a multiplanetary species.

Usually, the human body is protected from the ravages of space radiation as we all live deep inside a thick atmosphere surrounded by an invisible force field — our global geomagnetic field, the magnetosphere. Highly charged particles generated by the sun and deep space sources (such as supernovae) are deflected and absorbed as they strike our atmosphere.

But for astronauts aboard the space station, they are well above most of the protective layers we enjoy here on Earth, so they live in a higher-radiation environment and have to be warned of solar flare events, for example. But send astronauts further into interplanetary space and they’ll be completely on their own, drenched in the most energetic forms of radiation. Although shielding inside spacecraft will be essential, O’Banion URMC team has identified one type of radiation that will be very tricky to shield against.

High-mass, highly-charged (HZE) particles are heavy ions that are generated by supernovae. The most common high-energy particles to be emitted from our sun — protons — are low mass and therefore can be relatively easily shielded against. HZEs come in various types, but they are the “bunker busters” of high-energy radiation.

As they carry more mass, they have huge energies and are capable of penetrating the thickest shielding on spacecraft and spacesuits. “Because iron particles pack a bigger wallop it is extremely difficult from an engineering perspective to effectively shield against them,” said O’Banion. “One would have to essentially wrap a spacecraft in a six-foot block of lead or concrete.”

For the study, the researchers focused on the impact of energetic iron ions generated by particle collisions at the NASA Space Radiation Laboratory at Brookhaven National Laboratory on Long Island on the brains of mice. Of particular interest was whether the mice experienced neurodegeneration, particularly the biological processes that can trigger Alzheimer’s disease.

After the four-legged astronaut analogs were exposed to the equivalent amount of HZEs real astronauts would be exposed to during a hypothetical 3-year mission to Mars, the mice brains’ showed signs of the onset of Alzheimer’s.

Dear Readers: I have a good friend whose daughter has reached an age when thoughts of young men with round, strong arms fill the head. So, based on his concerns, I wanted to update one of my favorite posts involving biochemistry.

Captain Capitalism and I don’t disagree much — and here we are in complete agreement. He takes a sociological approach to the matter. I, on the other, am going the pure science route. Here is the compound responsible for the above-stated truth:

As a truly independent-minded woman with a science background, the tenet of feminist propaganda’s “you can have it all” approach that galls me most is:

Today, I am going to delve into the chemistry-based realities showing that this canon is a complete lie. Before I begin, I would like to note that I am not addressing the morality and theology related to the benefits of a “just say no” approach. I am sticking strictly to biochemical reactions.

Birth control and abortion options, which have expanded considerably in the past 40 years and hailed by feminists as emancipating women, seem to give both sexes the mistaken notion that they can have brief sexual encounters with serial partners and face no consequences that can’t be handled by a visit to a clinic.

For men, that remains somewhat true — or as true as it has been throughout history. However, for women, that remains as untrue today as it has been since Eve (for “intelligent designers”) or Lucy (for Darwinian evolutionists). The reason is oxytocin.

“Love is the drug” and oxytocin is that compound! When pumped into the bloodstream, oxytocin acts as a “neuromodulator,” giving people the warm-and-fuzzies and increasing the emotional bond between that person and the second individual (whose presence is stimulating the production of this hormone). One article lists 10 REASONS WHY OXYTOCIN IS THE MOST AMAZING MOLECULE IN THE WORLD. Chief among these reasons:

Often referred to as the “love molecule”, oxytocin is typically associated with helping couples establish a greater sense of intimacy and attachment. Oxytocin, along with dopamine and norepinephrine, are believed to be highly critical in human pair-bonding. But not only that, it also increases the desire for couples to gaze at one another, it creates sexual arousal, and it helps males maintain their erections. When you’re sexually aroused or excited, oxytocin levels increase in your brain significantly — a primary factor for bringing about an orgasm. And during the orgasm itself, the brain is flooded with oxytocin — a possible explanation for why (some) couples like to cuddle after.

Its power is not to be underestimated.

During millions of years of human evolution, the female system has been designed to begin a cascade of oxytocin production during two specific events: 1) When being intimate with a male; 2) When breast-feeding an infant. On the other hand, human males have very limited oxytocin levels (and actually release some of the little oxytocin they produce when “involved” with the woman of the moment).

Now, oxytocin is a wonderful thing. It energizes people, and makes them feel good about life. It enhances the immune system, as well as boosts other biochemical processes in the human body. Personally, after strawberry margaritas, oxytocin is my favorite chemical (and I have a graduate degree in chemistry, so I know chemicals).

However, as with everything else pleasurable in life, there can be a bit of a downside. Once a woman generates oxytocin, she will usually want to do everything in her power to keep up the production levels. For example, there are tales of women who nurse their babies past toddler-hood (until 3, 4 or 5 years in age). This is related to the fact these women want to continue releasing oxytocin (even though they will have other rationalizations).

The same thing is true following intimate relations. Oxytocin production can be stimulated in a woman through her lover’s voice, scent, sight and touch. This fact explains a wide range of female behaviors that follow intimacy. For example, women will call up their new partner frequently. They will steal their lover’s shirts to enjoy the scent. They will invent excuses to see the man-of-the moment. And the more oxytocin these women generate when with their lovers (or by talking to them), the more emotionally attached they get.

A few points to bear in mind, so that the role of oxytocin in human dynamics can be fully appreciated:

Though men do generate oxytocin, they don’t match the production levels in women.

Men can release small amounts of oxytocin into a woman (increasing her “rush”), thereby creating more of a bond between them.

Women will generate fairly substantial amounts the first time they are intimate with anyone (therefore, the biochemical basis for the focus on virginity), and increasing all the affects I have previously described.

These aspects are not necessarily bad, especially if a woman is involved with a nice man and is in a committed relationship. However, it can really complicate life if those conditions are not met. And, the bad thing about it is, the presence/voice of a lover or former beau can trigger oxytocin production in an affected female for up to 2 YEARS!!!!!!!

Basically, to guarantee a man will no longer have an affect on a woman, she can never hear/see/touch the man in question for up to two years. Fortunately, once the gentleman is “out of her system”, that same individual tends not to trigger such production again.

Whatever relationship path women travel, unlike “gender feminists”, I want my female compatriots to make fully informed decisions. I hope that they consider the information I have given and avoid mistakes that result in needless pain, heartache, life-altering consequences, and the following award:

Thirty years of birth control and abortion cannot get around this basic biochemistry, designed to create strong bonds between a female and her provider (the male) and offspring (her children). To think otherwise is arrogance and/or stupidity.

An intense biochemical bond is formed when women are intimate with men. To break that bond is exceedingly difficult, and places women in the position of having to quench a biochemical reaction, and in doing so, causing both physical and emotional stress that is unnecessary and unhealthy. Casual sex is devastating to women in so many different ways, and to pretend that women can have serial sex with many partners and not be physically and emotionally diminished by this is foolish.

I would like to commend noted lecturer, Dr. Patricia Allen, whose talk inspired my investigation into this topic many years ago. For those of you who are interested, I recommend the following video: No.1 Mistake Women Make With Men.

Millions of Years of Biology vs 50-years of Feminist Dogma — THE CHOICE IS YOURS!

But none of these treatments fix damaged tissue to heal the heart itself, says Biomedical Engineer David Stout of Brown University. The inadequacy of current treatments is reflected in some daunting statistics: scarred and damaged heart muscle results in heart failure for millions of heart attack survivors worldwide each year, and over half of heart attack survivors will have another heart attack within five years.

A new treatment option may be on the way, however. Stout and his graduate advisor, Biomedical Engineer Thomas J. Webster, have created a new material that could one day patch–and help restore–healthy heart tissue.

As a reminder to how vital anitbiotics effectiveness to all of this, at all levels of society, I offer this take in the era before them. President Coolidge lost his son to a simple injury, plunging him into a grief that impacted his effectivness:

On June 30, Coolidge’s two sons, eighteen-year-old John and sixteen-year-old Calvin Jr., played tennis on the south grounds of the White House. Young Calvin had worn sneakers but no socks. A blister developed on one of his toes but he ignored it. When he fell ill on July 2, White House physician Joel Boone discovered red streaks running up the boy’s leg. Laboratory tests soon showed that Calvin Jr. was suffering from pathogenic blood poisoning. In less than a week, the boy was dead.

THAT, my friends, is what we return to if our current crop of antibioics fail AND we drain pharma companies of their incentive and abilities to develop new ones.

The Fulton County Health Department confirmed Wednesday that residents at the homeless shelter where protesters have been occupying have contracted the drug-resistant disease. WGCL reports that a health department spokeswoman said there is a possibility that both Occupy Atlanta protesters and the homeless people in the shelter may still be at risk since tuberculosis is contracted through air contact.

“TB” is short for tuberculosis. TB disease is caused by a bacterium called Mycobacterium tuberculosis. The bacteria usually attack the lungs, but TB bacteria can attack any part of the body such as the kidney, spine, and brain. If not treated properly, TB disease can be fatal.

TB is spread through the air from one person to another. The TB bacteria are put into the air when a person with active TB disease of the lungs or throat coughs, sneezes, speaks, or sings. People nearby may breathe in these bacteria and become infected.

Sanitorium for TB Victims

Millions of people have died over the course of over 4,000 years from this disease. Famous sufferers include Honoré de Balzac, Emily Brontë, Dashiell Hammett, Vivien Leigh, Paul Gauguin, Frédéric Chopin, Igor Stravinsky, Cardinal Richelieu, and Saint Bernadette Soubirous. Here are the recent statistics on TB:

Despite all the drugs available today, tuberculosis is still a problem in many nations. According to World Health Organization (WHO) estimates, each year, 8 million people worldwide develop active tuberculosis and nearly 2 million die. While the overall rate of new tuberculosis cases has continued to decline in the United States since national reporting began in 1953, the annual decrease in tuberculosis cases has slowed dramatically. TB continues to kill between 2 and 3 million people every year. The WHO estimates that 36 million people will die of tuberculosis by 2020 if it is not controlled.

TB has the potential to kill many more people that student loan defaults. I had little comment when the OWS crowd was giving itself STDs. However, this disease is highly communicable, especially in the environs of a typical Occupy camp. I am a small government supporter, and I feel the government is regulating too much. However, protecting its citizens is the first order and prime duty of government. Now, it is up to state, local, and federal jurisdictions to begin acting on the behalf of all citizens.

Shut the Occupy movement down, now. It has become a danger to public health. It seems to me that if the Obama Administration was so keen on preventing an H1N1 epidemic, then they should be as diligent is stopping the spread of TB.

Dear Readers: I have been enjoying some podcasts by the pool during my American Exceptionalism tour. I was listening to the bru-ha-ha over Mark Halperin’s description of Obama and his behavior during the President’s most recent class warfare presser. I have to ask: What is the fuss about?

Frankly, as a happily married woman, I am fairly fond of the appendage to which Halperin referred — finding it highly useful. I would liken Obama more to an appendix — a vestigial organ that serves no significant function, yet under certain circumstances can cause life-threatening health problems that need prompt treatment.

Only complete removal of the organ in 2012 will restore our country’s economic heath. Fortunately, we don’t have to get approval from one of the Obamacare death panels to go forward with this treatment option.

Dear Readers: I wanted to return to my science roots and share with you an awesome video I gleaned from the Anchoress. It is an extremely interesting 46 minute BBC report on “How the Japan Tsunami Happened”:

As I watched it, these things stuck me strongly:

These things struck me strongly:

* The tsunami wave water traveled inland 8.5 km — just astonishing.

* Given the scale of the magnitude 9 quake, it is remarkable how little damage and how quickly Japan would have recovered with little effect if it weren’t for the following tsunami.

* One of those towns with the sea wall was featured on a National Geographic special on tsunami’s made in the early 90’s, because of its sea walls and drills.

* The image that will stick with me are the Japanese search and rescue teams poking in the mud for the dead, and sticking flags in when they locate a body. Haunting.

This week will be remembered as the one in which the two contenders for 2012 had the first campaign speeches of the cycle: Obama’s, which was essentially a toddler’s rant at Paul Ryan and quite distasteful; and, Palin’s Tea Party address in which the phrase, “fight like a girl” takes on new meaning. As Left Coast Rebel noted, there Sarah has many fans among Tea Party types.

I was a bit skeptical that Palin was going to mount a 2012 challenge. That was, until I saw this speech. She is obviously in it to win it. I am glad, as the rest of the likely field has failed to move me — or others. To out it in perspective: North of 8,000 people came to the Madison event, vs 50 people for a Trump event and 200 for a Pawlenty speech.

From Kimberly Dvorak of the San Diego Examiner: More than 2,000 citizen’s show-up for the ‘Stop Taxing Us’ annual Tax-Day Tea Party held at the Oceanside Pier, just north of San Diego.

The speakers at the event were not elected politicians, just community activists making the trek to the beach to show their solidarity with the movement that spontaneously erupted shortly after Barrack Obama became president and rammed through the very unpopular “stimulus” bill.

Left Coast Rebel was also in attendance, had had this report: Donald’s (NOTE; The Palin supporter in the above picture) a great guy and a true patriot that loves America with all he’s got. Hangin’ with him reminded me of something that limited government activists engaged in the good fight electronically or otherwise often don’t realize: face-to-face contact with fellow patriots is incredibly reinvigorating.

Shane Atwell has his review of “Atlas Shrugs”, which I must respect — he is our Randian Objectivist. For me, the money quote is: At the moment Rotten Tomatoes has Atlas Shrugged at 10% among critics and 85% among viewers. Is this another example of the divide in America between the leftist, intellectual ‘leadership’ and the immeasurably more honest, rational and selfish general public? As Shane’s impressions also seem to correspond with those of Capt. Ed of Hot Air, I will strive to see this film (though I share B-Daddy’s opinion of Rand).

Lorraine Yapps Cohen, another savvy female patriot, has a wonderful analysis that brings it all back to geology as part og her exceptional look at how prosperity relates to energy consumption): Colorado shale — On the report’s world map showing where those resources exist is a blob in the Rocky Mountains. This is Colorado shale. Extracting the energy in those rocks stopped before getting started. And it hasn’t started up in earnest since, for the environmentalist furor against producing our own.

Dear Readers: Regular visitors to the Shrine followed the efforts of California’s Tea Party groups (including the Southern California Tax Revolt Coalition) to promote Proposition 23 in November’s General Election. Proposition 23 would have delayed the implementation of California’s version of Cap&Trade (aka AB-32 – Global Warming Solutions Act). Sadly, it went down to defeat (and, even more sadly, it seems our opponents think it hurt Texas oil companies more that it will hurt California’s citizens). However, there was a proposed ruling issued yesterday that gives our team good hope that the impact of the economy-crushing AB-32 will be nullified:

The California Air Resources Board violated state environmental law in 2008 when it adopted a comprehensive plan to reduce greenhouse gases and again last year when it passed cap-and-trade regulations, a San Francisco Superior Court judge has ruled in a tentative decision.

….In his decision, Superior Court Judge Ernest Goldsmith ruled that the air board approved the larger plan to implement AB32 prior to completing the required environmental review, and that the board failed to adequately consider alternatives to cap and trade.

Superior Court Judge Ernest Goldsmith determine that the air board approved the blarge-scale implementation plans for AB32 without properly conducting an environmental review or considering alternatives to Cap and trade.

I must note that the plaintiffs are not exactly Tea Party types: The plaintiffs, who include “the Association of Irritated Residents”, initially backed AB32 and were opponents of Proposition 23. It seems these plaintiffs have problems with the ethics of how the Global Warming Solutions Act would be implemented.

Anthony Watts of Watts Up with That (a great website mingling science, culture, and commentary) had an assessment of the Proposition 23 battle that should be reviewed by ALL CALIFORNIANS in light of the proposed ruling: A money quote is: And while we are on the subject of money, I want to say that money has turned the Prop 23 issue into a veritable circus here. TV radio and web is being carpet bombed with anti prop 23 ads. It’s so bad that some other political candidates are complaining they can’t buy ad space on radio and TV.

One of the main anti-Prop 23 contributors was Hollywood’s James Cameron (he of the Titanic fame), who will never have to worry about making payroll for a small business nor making a decent salary for his family. Never forget the Ruling Class includes entertainment elites!